Pages

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

What does it mean to be an Anglican Christian (April 2010)?

I have put a date by the title to this post because I may sense a different answer is required in May 2010 or March 2014! But over the past week some interesting posts have been made available concerning Anglican polity, especially in respect of the evolving situation of the Diocese of South Carolina (Is it truer to TEC's true foundations than TEC itself? Or is it slowly asserting traditional South Carolingian values of being, well, rebellious to a larger sphere of government?). They have been made by the 'usual suspects': ACI and ACI, Mark Harris and Mark Harris. In the case of Mark Harris' posts on his blog Preludium, it is worth reading the comments which follow.

From a distance I find these debates interesting, but that may say more about me than about the debates! It seems strangely easy for some mistakes to be made, such as asserting the sovereignty of dioceses within a church such as TEC when the bishop of each diocese is dependent on consents of other bishops and standing committees to simply become the bishop. That's interdependency not sovereignty!

But my reflection here is less on the detail of polity and more on the question of what it means to be an Anglican. Here is my reading of some answers permeating through the ACI and Mark Harris posts.

(1) To be an Anglican Christian is to belong to a member church of the Anglican Communion and to abide by the decisions of that church (even if those decisions run against decisions of Communion bodies).

Comment: I discern this as the view at the top of TEC, supported by many commenters who weigh in against recently departed Episcopalians to ACNA as "wannabe Anglicans".

(2) To be an Anglican Christian is to belong to a member church of the Anglican Communion, to generally abide by the decisions of that church, but to reserve a right to distance oneself (and distance one's parish or diocese) from that member church in favour of a decision of the Anglican Communion.

Comment: This seems to be the situation in which the Diocese of South Carolina finds itself in.

(3) To be an Anglican Christian is to believe what Anglicans have believed through the ages, to worship according to Anglican patterns of worship (e.g. following an Anglican prayer book), and to live with a traditional Anglican order (deacons, priests, bishops).

Comment: This is the situation of those Anglican churches which are neither part of the Anglican Communion nor belong to ACNA. I think the Traditional Anglican Communion is one such body, though it is currently moving to become part of the Anglican Ordinariate of Rome.

(4) To be an Anglican Christian is all of (3 [corrected from initial post]) PLUS making every effort to be formally connected to the Anglican Communion, such effort may include being in an 'irregular' relationship with a member church of the Communion.

Comment: This is the situation of the Anglican Church of North America, which includes many churches which are overseen by bishops of Anglican churches outside of the geographical area of North America.

I admit personally to being somewhat obtuse about how (1) can be satisfactory. Yes, there will be differences of viewpoint between member churches of the Communion and some decisions of the Communion (ACANZP has experience of this, as commenters here never cease to remind me!). But it seems extraordinary that a trajectory of a member church could take it further away from the middle ground of the Communion with the effect that people leaving that church or rebelling against it for Anglican Communion reasons then become non-Anglicans. Too much disconnect there!

(2) is, in its own way, also very unsatisfactory. Too much unresolved tension. Something must give. My hope is that what will give is Communion resistance to formally (and joyfully) including those Anglicans who find themselves in tune with the mind of the Communion and out of tune with their local Anglican church (i.e. member church of the Communion).

In some ways (3) is the simplest position to assert: one can be Anglican whether or not the local member church of the Communion is swimming with the Communion or away from it, and whether or not the Communion embraces you.

Of course (4) hopes to gain from the possibility that may come to (2): the Communion will welcome those in situation (4).

Notice how (1), (2) and (3) all include the Anglican Communion as a necessary feature of being an Anglican: one is a member of a member church of the Communion or one is a member of a body making determined steps towards becoming a member of the Communion. Ergo the Anglican Communion has a significant role to play in what it means to be an Anglican.

Will it take up the challenges of that role? Will it welcome Christians whose heart, soul, mind and body is in tune with Anglican character as determined by the Anglican Communion? Will it tell member churches which make decisions difficult to square with Anglican theology to ease up on the pressure they place on dissident members?

From this perspective, if the Anglican Communion falls over, it may have come about because the Communion failed to take up its role of determining what it means to be an Anglican Christian!

6 comments:

“To be an Anglican Christian is to believe what Anglicans have believed through the ages, to worship according to Anglican patterns of worship (e.g. following an Anglican prayer book), and to live with a traditional Anglican order (deacons, priests, bishops).”

It may surprise you, Peter, but I would agree, more or less, with the above definition of what it is to be an Anglican in the broadest sense of the term.

When I was a youth in the early Sixties, one of our parish curates taught me about the existence of the Reformed Episcopal Church. Not withstanding the fact that this priest was very Anglo Catholic, he held (in common with most seminarians at General Theological in the 1930s and 40s) that the REC had a valid (though irregular) ministry. And while they were deeply influenced by “that heresy, Calvinism” they retained the essentials of being Anglican in the broadest sense.

Similarly, I would consider most, if not all, of the denominations of Continuing Anglicans to be truly Anglican. They are not, of course, presently members of the Anglican Communion. I would not preclude their joining the AC as, say, Associated Churches, if they were to agree to inter-communion with TEC. (Of course, Continuing Anglicans already can receive Holy Communion in TEC parishes).

Peter, are you sure of your enumeration? It seems to me that your item 4 would be not "all of (2) plus...." but rather "all of (3) PLUS making every effort to be formally connected to the Anglican Communion;" for item (2) already includes participation in some sense in the Communion through one of the national/provincial churches. So, then, "(1), (2) and (4) all include the Anglican Communion as a necessary feature...."

I suppose that once again the question is "for what purpose;" or perhaps "by whose measure." The responses offered to our current differences are largely institutional, including the draft Anglican Covenant. Institutional structures tend to draw institutional lines - for some purposes boundaries, while for some simply guidelines - such as some measure of participation in th Anglican Communion. To use the language of "Anglican family," as in the recent Church of England substitute motion, offers the widest participation but says nothing about relationships. To use the language of "Anglican tradition" begs the question of whether that is explicitly content, or also implies a method for theological reflection that allows for differences over time and among the parties reflecting. It also begs the question of how wide to consider "traditional Anglican order. Brother Kurt raises the point of REC orders as "irregular," without dismissing validity. One could say the same, really, about the first episcopal ordinations of AMiA - irregular, without making claims about validity. It could also be said for a small number of bodies in the United States claiming to be Episcopal/Anglican but are more progressive than the Episcopal Church (and yes, they do exist).

I am not aware of whether there are Anglican splinters as widely known outside of North America as they are here (with the notable exceptions of the Traditional Anglican Communion and the Church of England of [or is it "in"] South Africa - but surely not in the same numbers). Here in the United States there are simply so many small fragmented groups that coming to a broad enough understanding of what it means to be Anglican would seem difficult.

Hi Marshall,Whoops, yes, I got that enumeration wrong when reordering during writing - now corrected!

Thank you for your reflections, especially around "for what purpose" and "by whose measure".

I think it is Anglican to wish to be part of something bigger (including the wish of the Anglican Communion to seek to be part of a larger ecumenical world church with Catholics and Orthodox). It is also Anglican to make reference both to the local, historically continuous Anglican church (as measured by participation in the Anglican Communion) and to the global expression of being Anglican, i.e. to the Communion, when working out what it means to be Anglican, including ongoing reflection within developing Anglican tradition.

Your article would make a fine dictionary entry. You vow to your bishop, she and you are committed to General Synod, and pledge to your province’s formularies. There is no mention of “decisions of Communion bodies” in your constitution or canons. In fact there is not even a mention of “Communion bodies” in your constitution or canons. So for the purpose of you and the ministers you train the answer is (1). No disconnect, just integrity. If you don’t agree, don’t make the vows, don’t sign the promises. The disconnect is too many people sign the paper, make the vows, and then breach them.

Hi Anonymous,I am talking about the meaning of being an Anglican in general terms (for lay and for clergy, for unlicensed participants in the pews as well as for licensed participants in the sanctuary). Those who are licensed should stick by their vows and declarations as a matter of taking their vows and upholding them (or surrender their license). But the freedom of Anglican consciences allows one, licensed or unlicensed, to reflect upon the possibility that one's church is claiming the name 'Anglican' while moving in an 'unAnglican' direction.

There are aspects of theology 'on the ground', for instance, in the life of ACANZP which concern me viz a viz faithfulness to Anglican theology, and were they to be enshrined in our canons and constitution, then I would wonder at the direction our church was formally moving in as measured against the general direction of the Anglican Communion as a whole. To so wonder would not, I hope, be to the detriment of my integrity!

Flexible Recent Comment Widget for Blogger

Solidarity

Anglican Down Under

Welcome to this blog on Anglican, theological, biblical and other matters, mostly missional or liturgical (but I reserve the right to write about cricket). It is grounded in some islands at the bottom of the world which, together with a large island to our west, constitute fabulous Down Under.

Sometimes I pursue such a fine centrist line that I annoy people on either side of the line. If you do not like being annoyed then you know what to do.

I work for the Diocese of Christchurch and for Theology House, Christchurch. Views expressed here are not necessarily the views of either organisation. But I harbour the hope that what I say here is helpful to those with whom I am in fellowship because of these two entities!

ACANZP

ACANZP stands for Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia. In Aotearoa New Zealand this church is also known as Te Haahi Mihinare - The Missionary Church. (I work in ministry training and theological education in this church as Director of Education and Director of Theology House in the Diocese of Christchurch. Views expressed here are personal and not those of the Diocese, but the intent is not to express any personal views contradictory of the Diocese's).

Icon

Followers

Pearls

Show us anything clearly set forth in Holy Scripture that we do not teach and we will teach it. Show us anything in our teaching or practice is clearly contrary to Holy Scripture, and we will abandon it.

Stephen Neill

For the glory of God is a human being fully alive, and the glory of humanity is the vision of God.

St Irenaeus

Fundamentally the Gospel is obsessed with the idea of the unity of human society.

Masure

We have returned to the Apostles and the old Catholic Fathers. We have planted no new religion, but only preserved the old that was undoubtedly founded and used by the Apostles of Christ and other holy Fathers of the Primitive Church.

Bishop Jewel

Preachers shall behave themselves modestly and soberly in every department of their life. But especially shall they see to it that they teach nothing in the way of a sermon, which they would have religiously held and believed by the people, save what is agreeable to the teaching of the Old or New Testament, and what the Catholic fathers and ancient bishops have collected from this selfsame doctrine.

Canon 6 from the 1571 Bishop’s Convocation

Kent: "See better, Lear, and let me still remain."

William Shakespeare

For the clarity that we are aiming at is indeed complete clarity. But this simply means that the philosophical problems should completely disappear. Wittgenstein

Justice is eternal, and doesn't depend at all on human conventions.

Montesquieu

The real challenge of Islam to Western intellectual discourse is for us to ask ourselves whether our unprecedented modern experiment of conducting political life with no transcendent values is really working out as well as we once hoped.

Harvey Cox

The long-term happiness of a society depends on how individuals behave towards each other, how families hold together, and how leaders keep the trust of people.

William Hague

Where orthodoxy is optional, orthodoxy will sooner or later be proscribed.

John Neuhaus

To be an evangelical is not, first and foremost, about doctrinal correctness, but about a passion for the gospel of salvation from sin through Christ for eternity.

John Richardson

Neither may we ... lightly esteem what hath been allowed as fit in the judgement of antiquity, and by the long continued practice of the whole church; from which unnecessarily to swerve, experience hath never as yet found it safe.

Richard Hooker (Lawes, V.7.1)

The function of the Christian canon was to separate the apostolic witness from the ongoing tradition of the church, whose truth was continually in need of being tested by the apostolic faith.

Brevard S. Childs

Every word of God proves true. (Proverbs 30:5)

If the people of this religion are asked about the proof for the soundness of their religion, they flare up, get angry and spill the blood of whoever confronts them with this question. They forbid rational speculation, and strive to kill their adversaries. This is why truth became thoroughly silenced and concealed.

Muhammad ibn Zakariyā Rāzī

Something to think about

Given that, like it or not, much Anglican Communion trouble at root is about dispute over what the church should teach about homosexuality, two papers here may be helpful. They represent, in my view, some of the best arguments for and against setting aside or obeying Scripture's teaching. If only the authors were Anglican ...

Moderation Policy

Ad hominem attacks, potentially libellous comments, and comments with the appearance of being generated by a machine are liable to be rejected. Try hard not to use these words and their cognates: bigot, hypocrite, homophobia. Figure it out!

My strong preference here is for NO anonymous commenters. Please supply at least a first name. Some non de plumes allowed here belong to people I know personally. Anonymous comments published here likely pass on content grounds. Anonymity combined with ad hominisms = strike out.

Subscribe To

About Me

Blog Top Sites

Pageviews last month

Visitor Locations

Glossary

For people for whom NZ English is not their native tongue here are some translations of regular Maori words used here or in linked articles: Aotearoa: name for New Zealand; aroha: love; Ariki: lord; Atua: God; hui: gathering, assembly, conference; hui amorangi: regional area under leadership of regional bishop within Te Pihopatanga o Aotearoa (Diocese of Aotearoa); kai: food; kai moana: sea food; Ihu: Jesus; iwi: tribe; Karaiti: Christ; Kotahitanga/Te Kotahitanga: within ACANZP, the council responsible for drawing together the hopes and aspirations of the three tikanga for theological education and ministry training and transforming them into policy and into recommendations to the St John's College Trust Board for expenditure of educational funds; also the Board of Governors of St John's College (the primary, but not the only object of SJCTB expenditure); koha: gift, responsive gift to hospitality offered; mana: power, respect, honour; marae: community meeting area, including meeting hall and dining room; mihi: speech; moana: sea, ocean; pihopa: bishop; pihopatanga: bishopric, diocese; powhiri: welcome ceremony; rangimarie: peace; tangata: people; tangi: funeral; taonga: treasure; tikanga: culture, cultural stream, within ACANZP: one of the three strands, Maori [Te Pihopatanga o Aotearoa], Pakeha [NZ Dioceses], or Pasefika (Diocese of Polynesia) which make up our whole church under the authority of General Synod while being self-governing for many aspects of church life in each of the tikanga; waiata: song; wairua: spirit; Wairua Tapu: Holy Spirit; waka: canoe; whanau: family, extended family.